HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26990 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit, filed by the counsel for the applicant, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 35 of 2025, under Sections 108 B.N.S., Police Station- Bahilpurva, District- Chitrakoot during pendency of the trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the postmortem report, no external injury was seen on the body of the deceased. In the opinion of the doctor, cause of death was swelling due to poison. Viscera was preserved and was sent for chemical analysis. F.S.L. report is still awaited. It is next contended that as per the allegations in the first information, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S., are not made out against the applicant. The applicant, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Mahendra Awase vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2025) decided on 17.01.2025 and Laxmi Das vs. The State of West Bengal and Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 706 of 2017) decided on 21.01.2025. The applicant is a lady and has no criminal history. She is in jail since 22.6.2025. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anurag Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sehrunisha .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) In case she is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the postmortem report, no external injury was seen on the body of the deceased. In the opinion of the doctor, cause of death was swelling due to poison. Viscera was preserved and was sent for chemical analysis. F.S.L. report is still awaited. The necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S., are not made out against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than five months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant, Sehrunisha involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 9, 2025 S.S. BAIL No. 26990 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad